The New Pro-Life Battle

Defending the sanctity of human life at the beginning and end

Welcome back to The Burnett Breakdown after last week’s rant. If you enjoy the content, then don’t forget to like, subscribe, comment, and share it. I would greatly appreciate it.

To be, or not to be, that is the question:

Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer

The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,

Or to take arms against a sea of troubles

And by opposing end them.

Thus begins one of the greatest pieces of English literature: Hamlet’s soliloquy in Act 3, Scene 1 of Shakespear’s Hamlet. Here, Hamlet is contemplating whether life is worth living, or if it would be better to kill himself and “end the heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to.” This is really the existential question that every human faces.

Is life, specifically human life, inherently valuable?

While our immediate response is likely “of course it is,” it’s not obvious why that would be the case. In the animal world, there is absolutely no conception that another animal’s life is intrinsically valuable. Lions kill gazelles, snakes eat mice, sharks devour fish, etc. without blinking an eye and without being put on trial. Animals don’t hold other animals accountable for infringing on the rights of another.

Why do we treat human life differently?

Outside of there being something unique about humanity, such as being uniquely created in the image of God, I don’t see any reason that human death would be any different than the death of an animal. I know there are philosophical arguments against this line of thinking, but I find them utterly unconvincing. The dignity of humans, and all human rights, require there to be something sacred about human life that cannot come from the material world alone. There is a reason that the only civilization in the history of the world to establish and promulgate human rights is the Christian West, because it’s the only civilization that has had as a core tenant (whether it was fully practiced or not) humanity being created in God’s image.

This means that the sacredness, or inherent value, of human life stands above humanity’s judgement. We don’t get to decide what human life is and is not worthy of continuation - even our own.

Pro-Life Movement

The pro-life movement in America has rightly argued that the sacredness of human life is the reason that abortion should be illegal. The argument goes something like: “All killing of innocent human life is wrong. Abortion is the killing of an innocent human life. Therefore, abortion is always wrong.”

With tens of millions of abortions performed in the United States in the last half century, it makes sense that the primary focus of the pro-life movement has been the elimination of abortion. Even with the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, there is still much work to be done in minimizing the number of abortions that take place in the individual states where it is still legal. This piece is not in any way meant to minimize that work yet to be done.

However, I do want to urge pro-lifers to start considering what I believe is going to be the next big battle over the sanctity of human life: medically assisted suicide.

I’ve been thinking more about this ever since the United Kingdom voted in support of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill back in November. While this doesn’t guarantee that the legislation will become law (due to the nature of how the UK system works), it’s the next step in the process of the bill becoming law.

England is not even close to the first Western country to implement such a law with Australia, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Ecuador, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, and Spain all allowing some form of legally assisted suicide. There are even a handful of states where legally assisted suicide is available.

The argument in favor of assisted suicide (or “right to die” or “death with dignity” as proponents refer to it) are pretty straightforward. As Death with Dignity writes, “Our mission focuses on improving how people with terminal illness die… Our goal is to ensure people with terminal illness can decide for themselves what a good death means in accordance with their values and beliefs, and that should include having an option for death with dignity.” In other words, proponents of assisted suicide want people to have the ability to decide for themselves how and when they die when they have a terminal illness.

This is understandable. You can imagine a situation (and may have experienced a loved one in such a situation) where someone is in excruciating pain and suffering immensely in the last few days or weeks or months of their life. The best thing for them it seems would be for their life to end because then their misery ends as well.

In our individualistic western world, we prioritize personal choice over all so why would we not extend this logic to choosing when we die as well?

Against Assistant Suicide

My argument against assistant suicide begins exactly where I started this newsletter: the sanctity of human life. I use that word sanctity for a reason because it best encapsulates the uniqueness of human life. Sanctity comes from the same Latin word that means “holy” or “sacred” which one can equate to something like set apart from the ordinary. Things that are “holy” or “sacred” are distinct in an elevated way from everything else. I believe human life fits this bill as it stands above everything else as something unique.

In a sense, everything becomes subservient to human life including our own desires, choices, comforts, etc. This is why no argument in favor of abortion will ever convince me that it’s morally permissible, because I believe human life is simply more valuable than whatever other “good” it’s in tension with.

Fast forward to old age and I believe the same holds true. The protection of human life surpasses all other considerations including from the very person who wants to extinguish their own life. Human life is simply more valuable than even one’s own choice or comfort.

If human life is not “set apart” in a way that is sacred, then it’s merely one good amongst other goods that must be weighed in tension with one another. When the preservation of human life begins to be just one good among many then our civilization collapses because there is no consistent limiting principle that doesn’t lead to barbarity.

To prevent this devolution into the animal world, it is essential that we maintain the sanctity of human life above any and all possible exceptions. Whether those “exceptions” are the ones argued in favor of abortion or argued in favor of assisted suicide, it is incumbent upon pro-lifers to continue holding strong against these attacks on the facade of civilization.

God Bless,
Hunter Burnett